Case Page

 

Case Status:    SETTLED
On or around 11/20/2006 (Trial Verdict)

Filing Date: September 05, 2001

According to the docket, on July 15, 2005, the Court entered the Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice signed by U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer. The settlement was approved against Clarent Corporation and certain former directors and officers of Clarent Corporation. The Court further entered the Order approving the Plan of Allocation and the award of attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of expenses. On July 26, 2005, the Court also entered the Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice against Jerry Shaw-Yau Chang.

By the Notice of Pendency and Proposed Partial Settlement of Class Action dated May 13, 2005, the Court will hold a hearing on July 14, 2005, at 10:00 a.m., to decide whether to approve the settlement in the amount of $6.9 million. This $6.9 million is in addition to the $2 million settlement fund paid by or on behalf of other defendants, Cooley Godward LLP, and Deborah Ludewig (the “Cooley Defendants”), for claims on behalf of persons who acquired Clarent common stock between March 29, 2001 and August 31, 2001. A separate notice regarding that settlement was previously sent and the Court approved that settlement on March 25, 2005. In this court case, Ernst & Young LLP (“E&Y”) was also a defendant. On or about February 16, 2005, a jury found E&Y not liable.

The Court in charge of the case is the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, and the case is known as In re Clarent Corporation Securities Litigation, Master File No. C-01-3361 CRB. The institution who sued, Otter Creek Partners, is called the Lead Plaintiff. The following are current or former “Defendants” in the action: Clarent, E&Y, the Cooley Defendants, Jerry Shaw-Yau Chang, Matthew Chiang, Barry Forman, Richard J. Heaps, Michael F. Vargo, and Simon Wong. The settlement applies to all of these defendants except for the Cooley Defendants (which paid $2 million in a separate settlement) and E&Y (which prevailed at trial). This settlement also dismisses actual or potential claims against current and former directors, officers, and employees of Clarent or its subsidiaries, except Matthew Chiang, who are or were insureds under any of certain insurance policies issued to Clarent for the time period relevant to this lawsuit (herein referred to as “Released Persons”).

In a press release dated February 17, 2005, after 4 weeks of trial and 3 days of deliberation by a San Francisco jury in In re Clarent Corporation Securities Litigation, the jury found liability against one of the Individual Defendants, CEO of Clarent, for a knowing omission or misstatement in Clarent's second quarter 2001 10-Q. The jury also found that E&Y made a false statement in connection with Clarent's second quarter 2001 10Q, although it declined to assign liability to E&Y for the misstatement.

By the Notice of Pendency and Proposed Partial Settlement of Class Action dated November 12, 2004, a Settlement Hearing will be held on March 25, 2005, for the purpose of determining: (1) whether the Settlement of the claims against the Cooley Defendants, in the Cooley Action for the sum of approximately $2,000,000 in cash, plus accrued interest, should be approved by the Court as fair, reasonable, and adequate and, therefore, this Cooley Action against the Cooley Defendants should be dismissed with prejudice as set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement dated as of November 11, 2004 (the “Stipulation”); (2) whether the Plan of Allocation is fair and equitable and therefore should be approved; and (3) whether the application of Lead Counsel for the payment of attorneys’ fees, reimbursement of expenses, and interest thereon should be approved.

The original complaint charges Clarent and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. On September 4, 2001, Clarent announced in a press release that it had discovered information suggesting that its previously reported revenues for the first and second quarters of fiscal 2001 may have been materially overstated, and that the Company's Board of Directors was forming a special committee to investigate a number of transactions that placed in question the Company's historical financial results. The Company also stated that its first quarter 2001 revenues, as release on April 19, 2001, and its second quarter 2001 revenues, as release on July 19, 2001, will be reduced and the related net losses will increase upon conclusion of the review. In addition, the Company anticipates that its revenues for the second half of fiscal 2001 and for fiscal 2002 will be substantially below previously anticipated levels, and that the related losses will be significantly larger than expected. The Company also announced that several of its officers had been placed on administrative leave. On this news trading halted at $5.37.

COMPANY INFORMATION:

Sector: Technology
Industry: Communications Equipment
Headquarters: United States

SECURITIES INFORMATION:

Ticker Symbol: CLRN
Company Market: NASDAQ
Market Status: Public (Listed)

About the Company & Securities Data


"Company" information provides the industry and sector classification and headquarters state for the primary company-defendant in the litigation. In general, "Securities" information provides the ticker symbol, market, and market status for the underlying securities at issue in the litigation.

In most cases, the primary company-defendant actually issued the securities that are the subject of the litigation, and the securities information and company information relate to the same entity. In a small subset of cases, however, the primary company-defendant is not the issuer (for example, cases against third party brokers/dealers), and the securities information and company information do not relate to the same entity.
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 01-CV-3361
JUDGE: Hon. Charles R. Breyer
DATE FILED: 09/05/2001
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/20/2001
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/31/2001
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berger & Montague PC
    1622 Locust Street, Berger & Montague PC, PA 19103
    800.424.6690 215.875.4604 · investorprotect@bm.net
  2. Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (CA)
    425 California Street, Suite 2025, Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (CA), CA 94104
    415.433.3200 415.433.6382 ·
  3. Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York)
    10 E. 40th Street, 22nd Floor, Bernstein Liebhard & Lifshitz, LLP (New York), NY 10016
    800.217.1522 · info@bernlieb.com
  4. Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman LLP (Little Rock, AR)
    P.O. Box 25438, Cauley Geller Bowman Coates & Rudman LLP (Little Rock, AR), AR 72221-5438
    501.312.8500 501.312.8505 ·
  5. Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP
    100 Park Avenue, Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow LLP, NY 10017
    212.907.0700 212.818.0477 · info@glrslaw.com
  6. Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A.
    World Trade Center-Baltimore,401 East Pratt Suite 2525, Law Offices of Charles J. Piven, P.A., MD 21202
    410.332.0030 · pivenlaw@erols.com
  7. Leo W. Desmond
    2161 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, Suite 204, Leo W. Desmond, FL 33409
    561.712.8000 561.712.8000 · stocklaw@bellsouth.net
  8. Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP (former New York)
    500 Fifth Avenue, Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP (former New York), NY 10110
    212.608.1900 212.719.4677 · info@lshllp.com
  9. Mark McNair
    1919 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 800, Mark McNair , DC 20006
    703.273.3070 · wmmcnair@justice4investors.com
  10. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (S.F., CA)
    100 Pine Street - Suite 2600, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (S.F., CA), CA 94111
    415.288.4545 415.288.4534 ·
  11. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (San Diego, CA)
    600 West Broadway, 1800 One America Plaza, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (San Diego, CA), CA 92101
    800.449.4900 · support@milberg.com
  12. Schiffrin & Barroway LLP
    3 Bala Plaza E, Schiffrin & Barroway LLP, PA 19004
    610.667.7706 610.667.7056 · info@sbclasslaw.com
  13. The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. P.C. (New York, Former Office)
    275 Madison Avenue, 34th Floor, The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. P.C. (New York, Former Office), NY 10016
    212.686.1060 212.202.3827 · info@rosenlegal.com
  14. Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP (New York)
    270 Madison Avenue, Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP (New York), NY 10016
    212.545.4600 212.686.0114 · newyork@whafh.com
  15. Wolf Popper, LLP
    845 Third Avenue, Wolf Popper, LLP, NY 10022-6689
    877.370.7703 212.486.2093 · IRRep@wolfpopper.com
No Document Title Filing Date
COURT: N.D. California
DOCKET #: 01-CV-3361
JUDGE: Hon. Charles R. Breyer
DATE FILED: 03/31/2003
CLASS PERIOD START: 04/26/2000
CLASS PERIOD END: 08/31/2001
PLAINTIFF FIRMS NAMED IN COMPLAINT:
  1. Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (CA)
    425 California Street, Suite 2025, Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo (CA), CA 94104
    415.433.3200 415.433.6382 ·
  2. Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (former San Diego)
    12544 High Bluff Drive, Suite 150, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (former San Diego), CA 92130
    858.793.0070 858.793.0323 · blbg@blbglaw.com
  3. Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego)
    655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP (San Diego), CA 92101
    619.231.1058 619.231.7423 ·
  4. Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (S.F., CA)
    100 Pine Street - Suite 2600, Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach LLP (S.F., CA), CA 94111
    415.288.4545 415.288.4534 ·
No Document Title Filing Date
No Document Title Filing Date